On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 11:05:39 -0500, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Jaime Casanova <systemguards@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 23:31:26 -0500, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >> Why do you not define the problem as "when we decide a view is
> >> updateable and create the needed rules for it, also create default
> >> values for it by copying up from the base tables"?
> >>
> > Well, that was our first thought. but what if the default value is
> > changed in the base table?
>
> So? Being able to have a different default for the view could be
> construed as a feature, not a bug.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
We are not against this. As you say this is a feature, but if the view
doesn't have a default value we have to assign something in the
appropiate col in the insert.
ALTER TABLE view_name ALTER COLUMN ADD/DROP DEFAULT is your friend ;)
regards,
Jaime Casanova